A. Hindu Succession Act, 1956 (30 of 1956), Section 14(1) – Hindu Women’s right to maintenance -- Absolute property of woman -- Right of maintenance is sufficient for the property given in lieu thereof to transform into absolute ownership, by way of Section 14(1) of the HSA, 1956.

(Para 9.4)

B. Hindu Succession Act, 1956 (30 of 1956), Section 14(1) – Hindu Women’s right to maintenance -- Hindu Women’s right to maintenance is not by virtue of statute, but is found in Shastric Hindu law; maintenance has to be proper, appropriate and adequate, giving the woman so maintained the ability to continue to live the life, similar to what she once lived; and that the very right to receive maintenance is sufficient title to enable the ripening of possession into full ownership if she is in possession of the property in lieu of maintenance.

(Para 10)

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (26 of 1881), Section 138 -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 256 – Cheque bounce complaint – Dismiss in default -- Complaint was filed on 18.12.2020 and thereafter, the appellant/ complainant was regularly appearing before the Trial Court, however, on 23.08.2024 the appellant could not appear as wrong date was noted by the counsel, complaint was ordered to be dismissed for non-prosecution -- Held, Magistrate has discretion to dismiss the complaint, however, if the Magistrate finds that there was some valid reason for non-appearance of the complainant or the presence of the complainant was not required during the Court proceeding, he can very well exercise his discretion to adjourn the complaint -- While exercising the jurisdiction u/s 256 Cr.P.C., the Court has to take into consideration that the powers vested in it have to be exercised judiciously and in the interest of justice -- Impugned order set aside and the complaint is ordered to be restored to its original number.

(Para 11-14)

Hindu Succession Act, 1956 (30 of 1956), Section 6 -- Ancestral property -- Once a property is acquired by way of succession, the same loses its ancestral character.

(Para 5)

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (V of 1908), Order 18 Rule 3 -- Rebuttal evidence – Onus of proof – Effect of -- Onus of issue no. 1 was cast upon the plaintiff-petitioners and hence it was incumbent upon the plaintiff-petitioners to have led their evidence in the affirmative -- A party cannot be permitted to lead evidence in rebuttal the onus of which was cast upon the said party.

(Para 7)

Registration Act, 1908 (16 of 1908), Section 17(2)(xii) – Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (2 of 1899), First Schedule, Article 18, 23 -- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (V of 1908), Order 94 Rule 21 -- Auction sale – Sale certificate -- Stamp duty – Requirement of -- Sale certificate issued to the purchaser in pursuance of the confirmation of an auction sale is merely evidence of such title and does not require registration u/s 17(1) of the Registration Act -- Mere filing u/s 89(4) of the Registration Act itself is sufficient when a copy of the sale certificate is forwarded by the authorised officer to the registering authority – However, Articles 18 and 23 respectively of the first schedule to the Stamp Act respectively makes it clear that when the auction purchaser presents the original sale certificate for registration, it would attract stamp duty in accordance with the said Articles -- As long as the sale certificate remains as it is, it is not compulsorily registrable -- It is only when the auction purchaser uses the certificate for some other purpose that the requirement of payment of stamp duty, etc. would arise.

(Para 7, 13-20)

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (26 of 1881), Section 138 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 446, 482 – Cheque bounce complaint – Absence of accused -- Forfeiture of bail bond – Presence of accused – Requirement of – Presence of an accused, where proceedings are semi-criminal/ civil in nature, should ordinarily not be insisted upon, if an application is moved for a particular hearing, unless the trial court needs to either examine the under-trial or his statement is to be otherwise recorded for proceeding further in the matter -- Impugned order directing the forfeiture of the bail-bonds of the petitioner accused and initiating proceedings against his surety u/s 446 Cr.P.C. set aside.

(Para 1, 7-10)

Arms Act, 1959 (54 of 1959), Section 25, 27, 30 -- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 309 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 482 -- Attempt to commit suicide – Use of arms without license -- Petitioner No.1 was handling the licensed revolver of respondent no. 2 and while doing so, an accidental shot was fired -- Petitioner No.1 was having no mens rea to kill himself by committing suicide -- Illegal use of a licenced weapon per se does not constitute an offence u/s 27 of Arms Act – Alleged weapon used was having licence in the name of petitioner No.2 and thus no case is made out u/s 25 of the Arms Act -- Prima facie no offence u/s 30 of Arms Act is made out against the accused, as there was no breach of condition of the arms licence -- FIR and subsequent proceedings quashed.

(Para 8-14)

A. Railways Act, 1989 (24 of 1989), Section 2(29), 123(c), 124A -- Compensation in railway accident case – Untoward incident -- Strict liability – Negligence of victim – Ground of -- Liability of the Railway Administration is based on the ‘principle of strict liability’ -- Plea of ‘no fault of railways’ or ‘negligence of the victim’ is not available to the Railway Administration.

(Para 15)

B. Railways Act, 1989 (24 of 1989), Section 2(29), 123(c), 124A -- Compensation in railway accident case -- Untoward incident -- Passenger for the purpose of Chapter XIII of the Railways Act does not necessarily mean a passenger as contemplated under Section 2(29) of the 1989 Act -- Passenger shall include: a) a railway servant on duty; b) a person who has purchased a valid ticket for travelling by a train carrying passengers on any date; or c) a valid platform ticket and becomes a victim of an untoward incident -- Definition of ‘passenger’ as appended to Section 124A by explanation is much wider than the definition of ‘passenger’ as provided under Section 2(29) of the 1989 Act.

(Para 15)

C. Railways Act, 1989 (24 of 1989), Section 2(29), 123(c), 124A -- Compensation in railway accident case – Onus to prove -- Once affidavit is filed by the claimant that the victim was travelling on a valid ticket, the initial burden to prove that the victim was a bona fide passenger stands discharged -- Thereafter, it is for the Railways to rebut the same.

(Para 15)

D. Railways Act, 1989 (24 of 1989), Section 2(29), 123(c), 124A -- Compensation in railway accident case – Untoward incident is different from accident -- ‘Untoward incident’ is defined under Section 123(c) of the 1989 Act -- Under five situations as contemplated under proviso appended to Section 124A, the Railway Administration may be absolved of its liability -- Any other situation that does not fall within the ambit of proviso appended to Section 124-A, invites liability of Railway Administration to pay compensation.

(Para 15)

E. Railways Act, 1989 (24 of 1989), Section 2(29), 123(c), 124A -- Railway Accidents and Untoward Incidents (Compensation) Rules, 1990, Schedule -- Compensation in railway accident case – Untoward incident -- Appellant has placed on record the purchase of ticket by him – Initial onus  stands discharged, it was thereafter for the railways to prove that the deceased was not a bonafide passenger -- No evidence was led by railways to rebut the evidence of the applicant -- Appellant sustained injuries due to sudden jerk and jolt of the train -- Said situation does not fall within the exceptions as carved out in the proviso appended to Section 124A of the Act – Appeal allowed, accident is of the year 2013, thus, the compensation awarded to the appellant shall be as per Part I of the Schedule appended to the Railway Accident and Untoward Incidents (Compensation) Rules, 1990 prior to amendment dated 1st of January, 2017 i.e. Rs.4.00 lacs along with interest @ 9% per annum payable for the period from the date of application till the date of actual realization.

(Para 16-19)

Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 304A, 287 -- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (46 of 2023), Section 359, 528 – Death by electrocution in Rolling Mill – Non-compoundable offence -- Compromise quashing of FIR -- When the deceased’s family absolves the accused of any negligence or rash act, it would be impossible for the prosecution to succeed during the trial -- Thus, quashing of cases u/s 304-A IPC, other than roadside accidents, can be quashed depending upon the facts and circumstances of each case, the role assigned to the accused, mens rea, and the guilt of the such person -- After the death, the petitioners helped the complainant family financially and emotionally -- Accident occurred in broad daylight, and as an adult, the victim should have been more careful while performing his duties -- It is not a case where the acts of the Rolling mill or the Manager can be termed as rash or negligent -- Inherent jurisdiction u/s 528 BNSS, 2023 invoked, the FIR and all subsequent proceedings quashed.

(Para 7-18)

Limitation Act, 1963 (36 of 1963), Section 5 – Condonation of delay – Fault of Advocate – Ground of – Delay of 536 days in filing appeal -- Entire blame thrown on the head of the advocate -- Even if the concerned lawyer was careless or negligent, this, by itself, cannot be a ground to condone long and inordinate delay as the litigant owes a duty to be vigilant of his own rights and is expected to be equally vigilant about the judicial proceedings pending in the court initiated at his instance -- Litigant, should not be permitted to throw the entire blame on the head of the advocate and thereby disown him at any time and seek relief.

(Para 10)

Limitation Act, 1963 (36 of 1963), Section 27 – Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (V of 1908), Section 100 -- Adverse possession against co-sharer -- Possession of the plaintiffs was in a representative capacity being co-sharer -- Merely because a particular co-sharer is not in possession and is residing out of the village is not sufficient to prove ouster -- Concurrent findings of fact with regard to plaintiffs' failure to prove their ownership by way of adverse possession not interfered – Appeal dismissed.

(Para 12)

A. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 91 – Constitution of India, Article 21 -- Fair trial -- Right of accused – Preservation of call details – Right to privacy of police officials -- Legislative intent behind enactment of Section 91 Cr.P.C. is to ensure that no cogent material or evidence involved in the issue remains undiscovered in unearthing the true facts during investigation, enquiry, trial or other proceedings -- While passing the appropriate direction for preserving and production of call details/ tower location details u/s 91 Cr.P.C. would violate the right to privacy of the police officials but the right of the accused under Article 21 of the Constitution of India in ensuring free and fair investigation/ trial would prevail over the right to privacy of the police officials.

(Para 7)

B. Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 304-A, 427, 279 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 91 – Constitution of India, Article 21 -- Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (1 of 1872), Section 65A, 65B -- Death by rash and negligent driving -- Fair trial – Right of accused -- Preservation of call details – Denial of an adequate opportunity to the accused by non-production of the electronic record, which is admissible u/s 65-A and 65-B of the Indian Evidence Act in criminal trial, would amount to miscarriage of justice -- Power u/s 91 Cr.P.C. must be exercised for production of such evidence, which would assist the Court in discovering the truth in the pursuit of justice -- Learned trial Court directed to pass necessary directions u/s 91 Cr.P.C. for preserving and production of the call details/ tower location details of the phone numbers mentioned in the application filed u/s 91 Cr.P.C

(Para 8-10)

Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 419, 420, 120-B, 467, 468, 471 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 439 – Cheating and forgery – Regular bail -- All the offences are triable by the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class -- No prosecution witness has been examined so far as charges are yet to be framed -- Petitioner has suffered incarceration of 07 months 13 days not involved in any other case – Bail allowed.

(Para 9)

Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 420, 467, 468, 471, 506, 120-B – Attesting witness to agreement -- Cheating and forgery – Acquittal -- An attesting witness cannot be roped into the net of crime along with other accused persons, if there is no other allegations except that he is an attesting witness -- Original agreement to sell which was alleged to be forged was not produced in the trial Court -- Even no document expert was examined by the prosecution to prove the allegations of alleged fraud – Acquittal order, upheld.

(Para 13-16)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 8, 18, 29, 67 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 211, 401 -- Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (1 of 1872), Section 27 – NDPS case -- Framing of charge – Challenge to – No direct material that petitioner is the same person, which has come in the statement of co-accused -- On the basis of statement of the co-accused while in police custody recorded u/s 27 of the Evidence Act, the petitioner cannot be arrayed as accused in the trial -- Trial Court  completely ignored the lack of evidence in this regard -- Impugned order of charge against the petitioner set aside.

(Para 4-8)

Punjab Land Revenue Rules, Rule 15 – Constitution of India, Article 226 -- Appointment of Lambardar – Interference in -- Writ jurisdiction -- High Court cannot determine suitability of the parties especially when  respondent No. 4/ appointed candidate is not suffering from any disability which makes him ineligible for the post -- Petitioner is simply claiming that he is more meritorious and available to the villagers -- Respondent is also resident of the same village and is a deed writer and remains in Tehsil Complex -- There is no complaint of the villagers and petitioner cannot be heard to say that he is always available and respondent No. 4 is not available – Not appropriate to interfere with impugned orders and invoke writ jurisdiction.

(Para 6, 7)

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (59 of 1988), Section 148, 166 – Compensation in motor vehicle accident case -- Self-employed person – Fixed salary person – Future prospects -- Addition of future prospects cannot be denied in cases of self-employed persons or those employed on a fixed salary.

(Para 14-20)

A. Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (26 of 1996), Section 11 – Appointment of Arbitrator – Scope of inquiry u/s 11 of the Act, 1996 is limited to ascertaining the prima facie existence of an arbitration agreement -- High Court exceeded this limited scope by undertaking a detailed examination of the factual matrix -- High Court erroneously proceeded to assess the auditor’s report in detail and dismissed the arbitration application -- Existence of the arbitration agreement not disputed by the respondent –  Question whether there exists a valid dispute to be referred to arbitration can be addressed by the Arbitral Tribunal as a preliminary issue -- Appeal allowed, impugned order passed by the High Court set aside -- Sole arbitrator appointed to adjudicate the disputes between the parties.

(Para 18-23)

B. Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (26 of 1996), Section 11 – Appointment of Arbitrator – Misue of process -- Limited jurisdiction of the referral Courts u/s 11 must not be misused by parties in order to force other parties to the arbitration agreement to participate in a time-consuming and costly arbitration process -- To balance the limited scope of judicial interference of the referral Courts with the interests of the parties who might be constrained to participate in the arbitration proceedings, the Arbitral Tribunal may direct that the costs of the arbitration shall be borne by the party which the Tribunal ultimately finds to have abused the process of law and caused unnecessary harassment to the other party to the arbitration.

(Para 20)

Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 (XVII of 1887), Section 13, 16 --Appointment of Lambardar – Choice of Collector – Interference in – Permissibility of -- District Collector while appointing the appellant, had noticed that respondent no.4 was a serving Sarpanch and had been elected unanimously and he was also the Vice President of the Cooperative Society and therefore it could not be said strictly that he did not participate in the political activities -- He may be B.A pass and having more land is already 63 years old, whereas the appellant was 50 years of age -- Appellant is son of an ex-army man -- Commissioner interfered in the said appointment without recording any finding that there was any perversity in the order which is the basic criteria for interference -- Financial Commissioner dismissed the appeal -- Learned Single Judge chose to remand the matter -- Appeal allowed, setting aside of impugned orders, upholding the order of appointment of the appellant as Lambardar.

(Para 1-8)

Constitution of India, Article 226, 227 – Haryana Land Revenue Act (XVII of 1887), Section 13, 16 -- Appointment of Lambardar – Challenge to – Dealy and laches – Appointment was made way back in the year 2012 – Neither the Commissioner nor the Financial Commissioner chose to interfere with the order passed by the Collector – Ld. Single Judge dismissed the writ petition while noticing that there was an inordinate delay of almost four years in approaching the High Court after finalization of the proceedings upto the Financial Commissioner – LPA dismissed.

(Para 2, 3)

Haryana Land Revenue Rules, Rule 15 -- Appointment of Lambardar – Death of appointed lambardar – Right of other candidate -- Deceased-appellant was appointed by the Collector on 11.06.1997 – LPA pending has been rendered infructuous -- For all practical purposes, the appellant continued to serve as Lambardar from 1997 before he has expired -- It is, thus, open to the authorities to initiate the process for appointment of Lambardar -- Respondent No.4 would not have a vested right to be appointed merely on account of death of the appellant as fresh candidates would have to be considered who would be fully eligible -- It would be open to respondent No.4 to apply afresh.

(Para 3-5)

A. Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (45 of 2023), Section 80, 85, 108, 3(5) -- Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, (28 of 1961), Section 3, 4 – Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (46 of 2023), Section 482 -- Dowry death – Abetment to suicide -- Anticipatory bail -- Son of the appellant (mother-in-law) has been arrested and he is still in custody – After interim protection, despite communication sent by the appellant to investigating authority, the investigating authority has not called her for joining the investigation – Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the custodial interrogation of the appellant is not required – Anticipatory bail allowed.

(Para 2-9)

B. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 82, 438 – Proclaimed person/ Proclaimed offender – Anticipatory bail – Maintainability of -- Consideration of anticipatory bail, in the event of the declaration u/s 82 of the Cr.P.C., it is not as if in all cases that there will be a total embargo on considering the application for the grant of anticipatory bail -- When the liberty of the appellant is pitted against, the Court will have to see the circumstances of the case, nature of the offence and the background based on which such a proclamation was issued.

(Para 8, 9)

Court Fees Act, 1870 (7 of 1870), Section 6A, 7(iv-A) – Advalorem court fee -- Suit claiming a decree for declaration to the effect that the gift deed be declared as null, void, forged and fabricated having no effect on the rights of the plaintiff and consequential information in this regard be sent to the Sub-Registrar's office -- It is not a simplicitor suit for declaration of rights and it clearly falls under section 7(iv-A) of the Act.

(Para 3, 11)

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (26 of 1881), Section 138 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 82, 482 -- Cheque bounce complaint – Proclaimed person --  Petitioner is keen to join the proceedings -- Petition disposed of and the impugned order set aside subject to payment of Rs.10,000/- as costs to be paid to the complainant – On surrender of the petitioner with cost of Rs.10,000/- within 10 days, the Court concerned directed to admit him to bail subject to its satisfaction and decide the application for revival of the complaint in accordance with law.

(Para 4)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 21, 21(c), 22(c), 23(c), 25, 27-A, 29 -- Prisons Act, 1894 (9 of 1894), Section 42, 52-A – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 439 – NDPS – Regular bail -- Recovery of 1600 grams of heroin from co-accused -- Petitioner in custody since 18.09.2023; challan was presented on 12.03.2024 followed by framing of charges on 07.06.2024 -- Till date none of the 31 prosecution witnesses examined – No recovery of any contraband or even mobile handsets was affected from the petitioner; the petitioner is being sought to be linked to the co-accused only on the basis of some mobile calls made between him and them – Bail allowed.

(Para 7)

Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 489-A, 489-B, 489-C, 489-D – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 439 -- Recovery of counterfeit currency – Regular bail -- Petitioner in custody since 04.04.2024 -- Entire case of the prosecution is based on documentary evidence, which is already part of the challan -- Trial is unlikely to conclude in the near future – Bail allowed.

(Para 6)

Constitution of India, Article 226 -- Retail and Wholesale Drug License  -- Delay in submission of application beyond time granted by High court – Rejection on that ground – Justification of -- Ends of justice would be well served in case the applications that were filed by the petitioner beyond the time prescribed by High Court, are treated as being in compliance of order passed by High Court and adjudication thereof is done by the concerned Authority on merits of the same, after granting an opportunity of hearing to the respective parties – Petition allowed.

(Para 1-7)

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (46 of 2023), Section 480(6), 483 -- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 420, 406, 120B – Cheating – Non-conclusion of trial within 60 days -- Bail – Right of -- Charges framed on 31.05.2024, case is triable by the Magistrate -- First date for recording evidence was 14.06.2024 and 60 days completed on 13.08.2024 -- Accused-petitioner is in custody for more than two years -- Only one prosecution witness out of total 33 prosecution witnesses examined -- Accused cannot be continued in custody for an indefinite period and that too for no fault on his bail in conclusion of the trial as per the mandate of Section 480(6) of BNSS – Bail allowed.

(Para 9, 10)

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 374, 389 – Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (26 of 1881), Section 138, 148A -- Conviction in cheque bounce complaint -- Appeal -- Suspension of sentence – Pre-deposit of 20% of compensation -- Looking at the financial condition of the petitioner, directing her to deposit 20% of the amount as per impugned order shall result in jeopardizing her appeal being dismissed on account of non-compliance of the condition of deposit -- Condition of pre-deposit of 20% of interim compensation set aside, Ld. Sessions Judge ordered to proceed with hearing of the appeal without insisting for pre-deposit and dispose of the same in accordance with law.

(Para 8, 9)

A. Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (59 of 1988), Section 166 -- Compensation in motor vehicle accident case – Truck hit scooty from back side -- Contributory negligence – Plea of -- No evidence produced in regard to allegation of contributory negligence -- Case pleaded that on being hit by the truck from the back side, the deceased had fallen and came under the front wheel of the truck, which is possible -- Contention of the insurance company that there was contributory negligence of the deceased is liable to be repelled only and accordingly repelled.

(Para 18-21)

B. Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (59 of 1988), Section 166 -- Compensation in motor vehicle accident case – Future loss of income -- Future prospects -- Compassionate appointment to dependent – Effect of – Deceased was getting Rs.34,351/- at the time of accident, son of the deceased was appointed on a remuneration of about Rs.12000-13,000/-, therefore, firstly it cannot be said that there was no loss of income to the family – Secondly, compassionate appointment cannot be equated with the future prospect – Contention that the claimants are not entitled for the future prospects on the ground of 58 years of age deceased is misconceived and not tenable because the death of bread earner of family is always loss to the family, who would have contributed to the family in future and his earnings may have increased in any manner.

(Para 22-33)

C. Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (59 of 1988), Section 134, 149, 166 – Compensation in motor vehicle accident case – Enquiry u/s 134 of MV Act – Ground of -- Grounds of section 134 (c) of the Act of 1988 is not provided u/s 149 (2), ground not available to the appellant/ Insurance Company – Even otherwise, once an enquiry has been held by the tribunal after affording sufficient opportunity to the appellant/ insurance company, the plea of the appellant that since provisions of Section 134 (c) of the Act of 1988 have not been complied, therefore, the insurance company is not liable to make the payment of compensation is misconceived and not tenable because it has no concern with the claim of the dependents and family members of the deceased.

(Para 34-38)

Uttar Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1916 (II of 1916), Section 3, 4, 5 – Constitution of India, Article 243-Q – Inclusion in transitional area of Nagar Panchayat – Opportunity of hearing to effected partes -- Notification u/s 3 visits the persons living in the area notified with several civil consequences that may include taxation on properties, deprivation of benefits from government programs and schemes for village areas, etc. – Opportunity of making objections and /or suggestions after publication of draft notification and due consideration of the same by the Governor, are vital and mandatory requirements of the statute -- Each person resident of such area which is subject to such notification, is a stakeholder and is conferred a right by the Act, 1916 to make suggestions and objections -- Such suggestions and objections, when duly filed, have to be accorded due consideration by the Governor, and the State Government cannot brush aside an objection by means of a general denial on the ground that it was not received within the time provided in the draft notification where it has been demonstrated by the petitioner that the objection was duly dispatched and the delivery report of the postal department reflects its delivery to the addressee -- Objections of the petitioners were never considered – Impugned notification / order quashed.

(Para 11, 19, 20)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 21(b) – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 397, 401, 451 -- NDPS Case – Superdari of motorcycle -- Motor cycle owned by petitioner seized by the police in criminal case under NDPS Act -- Trial will take time to conclude -- Even if the said motor cycle is a case property, it cannot be kept in the malkhana for indefinite period -- Application filed by the petitioner seeking release of his motor cycle on supurdari allowed.

(Para 7-9)

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (45 of 2023), Sections 305(a), 331(4) – Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (46 of 2023), Section 528 – House-trespass or House breaking/ 331(4)-BNSS -- Compromise quashing of FIR -- Compromise arrived at between the parties verified and confirmed -- FIR and all consequential proceedings, quashed.

(Para 1-6)

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (45 of 2023), Section 323(4), 324(5), 333, 191(3), 190, 305 – Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (46 of 2023), Section 528 – House trespass after preparation for hurt, assault or wrongful restraint/ 333-BNS – Rioting armed with deadly weapon/ 191(3)-BNS – Compromise quashing of FIR -- Compromise arrived at between the parties verified and confirmed -- FIR and all consequential proceedings quashed.

(Para 1-6)

Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 452, 384, 506, 120-B, 216 -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 439 -- Murder – Conspiracy -- Regular bail -- Appellant nominated as an accused only for being part of the conspiracy to the crime in question and he was not present when the alleged murder took place -- Bail allowed.

(Para 8, 9)

A. Specific Relief Act, 1963 (47 of 1963), Section 10 -- Suit for specific performance of agreement -- Evidence of attorney -- One of the purchasers and plaintiff in his suit for specific performance throughout present in the transaction held the Power of Attorney from the other plaintiffs – He was examined as PW-1 in each of the suits whether in his capacity as plaintiff or as Power of Attorney from other plaintiffs -- It was not necessary for each of the plaintiffs in separate suits to appear and prove the transaction -- Trial Court had examined this aspect and had found favour with the plaintiffs – Adverse inference drawn by the High Court for the reason that the plaintiffs did not enter the witness box to prove the Agreement to Sell, was completely misplaced.

(Para 28)

B. Specific Relief Act, 1963 (47 of 1963), Section 10 – Limitation Act, 1963 (36 of 1963), Article 54 -- Suit for specific performance of agreement – Limitation -- Agreement to Sell dated 30.08.1990 did not mention any date for the performance, nor did owner refused at any point of time and soon after the death of owner in December 1992, the plaintiffs having come to know of the mutation proceedings by her legal heirs, they proceeded to file the suit, after giving notice in May 1995, which was well within a period of three years -- Second part of Article 54 of the Schedule to the Limitation Act would be applicable once there was no date fixed for performance in the Agreement to Sell.

(Para 27, 30)

C. Agreement to sell – Possession with original title deed – Effect of -- A purchaser who has paid the full consideration and received the original title deeds from the seller would have taken possession under normal circumstances -- Any possession taken by any other party thereafter would be unauthorised and illegal.

(Para 32)

D. Violation of Injunction order – Alienation of the property in violation of the injunction order -- Sale deed would be a void document.

(Para 33)

Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 302 , Section 304 Part I – Culpable homicide not amounting to murder – Benefit of doubt -- Previous enmity between the parties -- A month prior to the date of the incident, an FIR was lodged by the wife of the appellant No.1 against the deceased since he had tried to dispossess the appellants -- Place of the incident is adjacent to the field in possession of the appellants -- Weapons used by the accused persons are axe and sticks commonly used by the agriculturists -- No material to show that there is any premeditation – Possibility of offence being committed by the appellants without premeditation in a sudden fight in a heat of passion upon a sudden quarrel cannot be ruled out -- It cannot be said that the appellants have taken undue advantage or acted in a cruel or unusual manner -- Appellants would be entitled to benefit of doubt, conviction u/s 302 IPC needs to be altered Part I of Section 304 IPC.

(Para 18-21)

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (26 of 1996), Section 6A, 11(6) – Appointment of Arbitrator – Assignment of agreement – Effect of -- Existence of arbitration agreement in the license agreement and share subscription agreement is not in dispute – Court has to confine itself to the examination of the existence of an arbitration agreement, it would not be appropriate for Court to delve deep into the issue --  Matter referred to the Delhi International Arbitration Centre for appointment of a sole arbitrator to adjudicate upon the dispute between the parties.

(Para 5, 11, 12)

A. Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 441, 442, 452 -- House trespass after preparation for hurt, assault or wrongful restraint – Incident at restaurant – Acquittal -- Incident had taken place in a restaurant run by the injured PW-1, which cannot be said to be either a place used for human dwelling or for worship or for the custody of the property -- Appellant could not have been convicted for the offence under Section 452 IPC – Conviction set aside -- Appellant acquitted for the offence u/s 452 IPC.

(Para 10-12)

B. Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 441, 442, 452 -- House trespass after preparation for hurt, assault or wrongful restraint -- The “house trespass” being an essential ingredient for convicting a person under Section 452, it has to be proved by the prosecution that the accused committed the house trespass and criminal trespass by entering into or unlawfully remaining in any building, tent or vessel used as a human dwelling or any building used as a place for worship, or as a place for the custody of property, as contemplated in Section 442 IPC.

(Para 9)

A. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 389(1) -- Suspension of fine -- While convicting an accused, if a direction is issued against him to pay a fine, such a direction can be suspended in the exercise of power under sub-section (1) of Section 389 of the CrPC.

(Para 6)

B. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 389(1) – Constitution of India, Article 21 -- Suspension of sentence/ fine -- While suspending the sentence, especially the sentence of fine, the Appellate Court can impose conditions -- Court has to keep in mind that if a condition of deposit of an amount is imposed while suspending the sentence of fine, the same should not be such that it is impossible for the appellant to comply with it, defeating his right of appeal against the order of conviction, which may also violate his rights under Article 21 of the Constitution.

(Para 8)

Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002, Rule 9(4)(5) – Auction sale by bank – Sale certificate -- Non-deposit of auction amount within 15 days – Extension of time -- Respondents/ auction purchaser sought extension of time for the reason that the appellant-Bank itself was not in a position to accept the amount as there was a complaint to the CBI, an advisory of the ED and a stay from the High Court -- Silence on part of the appellant-Bank in either immediately revoking the sale confirmation or refusing to extend the time, impliedly amounted to extension of time in writing with consent.

-- Respondents were always ready and willing to deposit the balance auction amount of Rs.1,06,50,000/- and had rather submitted a bank draft dated 15.10.2022 of the said amount and had requested for the issuance of the sale certificate and possession of the auction property – It establishes the bona fide of the respondents and it was only the appellant-Bank who had avoided the issuance of the sale certificate.

-- Non-issuance of the sale certificate is solely attributable to the appellant-Bank and that there were no latches, negligence or default on part of the respondents in offering to deposit the balance auction amount.

Non-deposit of the said amount within the stipulated period would not be fatal within the meaning of sub-Rules (4) and (5) of Rule 9 of the Rules.

(Para 16-19)

Constitution of India, Article 30(1) – Minority educational Institution – Legislative/ Administrative Power to change -- Article 30(1) can be classified as both an anti-discrimination provision and a special rights provision -- A legislation or an executive action which discriminates against religious or linguistic minorities in establishing or administering educational institutions is ultra vires Article 30(1).

-- Religious or linguistic minorities must prove that they established  the educational institution for the community to be a minority educational institution for the purposes of Article 30(1);

-- The right guaranteed by Article 30(1) is applicable to universities established before the commencement of the Constitution;

-- The right under Article 30(1) is guaranteed to minorities as defined upon the commencement of the Constitution. A different right-bearing group cannot be identified for institutions established before the adoption of the Constitution;

-- The incorporation of the University would not ipso facto lead to surrendering of the minority character of the institution. The circumstances surrounding the conversion of a teaching college to a teaching university must be viewed to identify if the minority character of the institution was surrendered upon the conversion. The Court may on a holistic reading of the statutory provisions relating to the administrative set-up of the educational institution deduce if the minority character or the purpose of establishment was relinquished upon incorporation; and

The following are the factors which must be used to determine if a minority ‘established’ an educational institution:

i. The indicia of ideation, purpose and implementation must be satisfied. First, the idea for establishing an educational institution must have stemmed from a person or group belonging to the minority community; second, the educational institution must be established predominantly for the benefit of the minority community; and third, steps for the implementation of the idea must have been taken by the member(s) of the minority community; and

ii. The administrative-set up of the educational institution must elucidate and affirm (I) the minority character of the educational institution; and (II) that it was established to protect and promote the interests of the minority community.

The view taken in Azeez Basha’ case AIR 1968 SC 662 that an educational institution is not established by a minority if it derives its legal character through a statute, is overruled -- The question of whether AMU is a minority educational institution must be decided based on the principles laid down in the judgment.

(Para 160, 161)

Reference answered with majority opinion

Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 (39 of 1987), Section 22C – Electricity Act, 2003 (36 of 2003), Section 42 -- Public Utility service – Electricity billing dispute – Alternative dispute redressal mechanism -- Prima facie the dispute does not pertain to ‘supply of electricity and rather it is a ‘billing dispute’ – Being the technical dispute the legislature provided for the dispute redressal mechanism under the Act – Dispute essentially and primarily required to be raised before the forum so prescribed under the Statute – Proceedings before Permanent Lok Adalat (Public Utility Services) not maintainable.

Punjab Land Revenue Rules, Rule 15 – Constitution of India, Article 226 -- Appointment of Lambardar – Younger in age – Non-consideration of other factors – Effect of -- Petitioner was appointed as Lambardar by Collector, only on the ground that she is younger than the other candidates; whereas, the other factors, as envisaged under Rule 15 of the Punjab Land Revenue Rules, have not been taken into consideration – Commissioner remanded back the case, which order was upheld by the Financial Commissioner --  Case requires a fresh look at the level of District Collector is correct and does not call for any interference.

(Para 8.1-9)

A. Specific Relief Act, 1963 (47 of 1963), Section 10, 16 -- Limitation Act, 1963 (36 of 1963), Article 54 – Suit for specific performance – Limitation -- Limitation prescribed by Article 54 sets in from the date when the petitioner received the reply refusing performance.

(Para 31)

B. Specific Relief Act, 1963 (47 of 1963), Section 10, 16(c) – Specific performance of agreement – Readiness and willingness – Purchaser paid a sum of Rs.11,30,00 as earnest money and paid Rs.13,00,000 on the same day by cheque and paid another Rs. 5,00,000 by Demand Draft -- If the petitioner was unwilling to perform the contract, he would not have paid nearly 75 percent of the sale consideration -- Petitioner with the payment of the additional sum above the earnest money, has proved his readiness and willingness to perform the contract -- Fit case for to exercise discretion to direct specific performance.

(Para 42)

C. Transfer of Property Act, 1882 (4 of 1882), Section 52 – Lis panders -- Doctrine of lis pendens that Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act encapsulates, bars the transfer of a suit property during the pendency of litigation -- The only exception to the principle is when it is transferred under the authority of the court and on terms imposed by it -- Where one of the parties to the suit transfers the suit property (or a part of it) to a third-party, the latter is bound by the result of the proceedings even if he did not have notice of the suit or proceeding.

(Para 47)

D. Transfer of Property Act, 1882 (4 of 1882), Section 52 – Object of doctrine of lis pendens -- Purpose of lis pendens is to ensure that the process of the court is not subverted and rendered infructuous --  In the absence of the doctrine of lis pendens, a defendant could defeat the purpose of the suit by alienating the suit property.

(Para 49)

E. Transfer of Property Act, 1882 (4 of 1882), Section 52 – Lis pendens – Review -- Pendency means -- Review proceedings were “instituted” within the period of limitation of thirty days –  Doctrine of lis pendens kicks in at the stage of “institution” and not at the stage when notice is issued by this Court -- Argument of the respondents that the doctrine of lis pendens does not apply because the petition for review was lying in the registry in a defective state cannot be accepted.

(Para 49)

A. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 427, 482 – Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 379 – Electricity Act, 2003 (36 of 2003), Section 136 – Conviction in 21 case – Concurrent running of sentence – All cases decided on the same day -- Total period of sentence awarded to petitioner would come to 21 years in respect of the period of convictions so awarded -- Petitioner is entitled for benefit of discretion contained in Section 427 of Cr.P.C. and the same deserves to be exercised to meet the ends of justice.

(Para 4, 6)

B. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 427, 482 – Conviction in 21 case – Default sentence – Concurrent running of sentence – Permissibility of -- For default sentences, the provisions of Section 427 of Cr.P.C. did not direct for concurrent running of the sentences -- Default Sentences in default of payment of fine shall run consecutively if he does not pay the fine.

(Para 7)

East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (III of 1949), Section 13B, 15 – Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (V of 1908), Order 41 Rule 27 – Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (1 of 1872), Section 90 -- NRI Landlord – Ownership – Proof of – Additional evidence – 30 year old sale deed – Presumption -- Registered sale deed of 1937 produced from proper custody and being more than 30 years old document carries presumption in terms of Section 90 of Indian Evidence Act and its veracity cannot be impeached at the hands of tenant – Application to lead additional evidence in the shape of sale deed allowed – Matter remanded back to Rent Controller with liberty to tenant for rebuttal if any.

(Para 9-12)

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (V of 1908), Section 151 – Additional evidence -- Not a single averment in the application as to the relevancy of the documents -- In the absence of any explanation, the application has rightly been rejected.

(Para 8)

Railways Act, 1989 (24 of 1989), Section 124, 124A -- Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 (54 of 1987), Section 16 -- Compensation in railway accident case – Fixed deposit for major claimant – Permissibility of -- 90% of the compensation amount awarded by the Tribunal ordered to be kept in fixed deposits even though appellant No.1 is major -- Amount awarded to the claimants apart from that awarded to the minors ordered to be released -- Amount of award in favour of the minors/ appellants shall remain invested in the Fixed Deposits till they attain age of majority.

(Para 1, 2)

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (45 of 2023), Section 3(5), 108 – Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (46 of 2023), Section 482 -- Abetment to suicide – Anticipatory bail -- Deceased-employee was disturbed since about 2 weeks, his seniors/ petitioner at Bank were harassing during duty – Prosecution failed to provide specific allegations or instances demonstrating the petitioner’s role in prompting or instigating the deceased to commit suicide -- Primafacie basic ingredients of Section 108 and 3(5) of BNS, 2023 not met out -- It would be a futile exercise to send the petitioner behind the bars for custodial interrogation – Anticipatory bail allowed.

(Para 2-5)